384-e 


SB    2fl 


B   X 

5937 

D69 

1901 

MAIN 


GIFT  OF 


ROMANIZING 
TENDENCIES 

IN  THE 
EPISCOPAL 

CHURCH 


SERMON  DELIVERED  IN  CHRIST  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH, 
LOS    ANGELES,    CALIFORNIA,    BY    ITS   RECTOR,    THE 

REV.  GEO.  TITOS.  DOWLING,   D.  D. 

— ^— =—   JULY   14,   1901   ==—==—= 


PUBLISHED    BY    THE    VESTRY 


ROMANIZING  TENDENCIES 
IN  THE  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH 


SERMON  DELIVERED  IN  CHRIST 
EPISCOPAL  CHURCH,  LOS  AN- 
GELES, CAL^  JULY  J4,  1901,  BY 
ITS  RECTOR,  THE 

REV.  GEO,  THOS,  DOWLING,  D.  D. 


r  i  f  T  n   T  n  o  t  5  A  N  i 


PUBLISHED    BY   THE    VESTRY 


RESOLUTIONS  BY  THE  VESTRY. 

The  following  resolutions,  presented  by  Judge  Albert  M. 
Stephens,  and  seconded  by  Judge  James  A.  Anderson,  were 
unanimously  passed  by  the  Vestry  after  listening  to  the  sermon  : 

WHEREAS,  we,  the  Vestry  of  Christ  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church,  believe  that  the  discourse  delivered  this  morning  by 
our  Rector,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Geo.  Thos.  Dowling,  on  "Roman- 
izing Tendencies  in  the  Episcopal  Church,"  dealing,  as  it  did, 
with  that  question,  in  a  Christian  and  judicial  spirit,  and  from 
the  broadest  standpoint,  reveals  facts  of  a  startling  character 
which  are  not  generally  known;  and,  whereas,  the  circulation 
of  such  information  is  in  our  judgment  most  important  and 
timely;  therefore, 

RESOLVED,  that  we  extend  to  Dr.  Dowling  our  grateful 
congratulations  for  his  courage  in  speaking  thus  openly  and 
cogently,  on  a  topic  of  such  importance. 

RESOLVED,  that  we  request  from  him  the  liberty  of  pub- 
lishing said  discourse  in  pamphlet  form. 

RESOLVED,  that  we  appoint  our  Junior  Warden,  George 
W.  Parsons,  a  committee  to  attend  to  such  publication. 

RESOLVED,  that  we  do  hereby  authorize  and  request  Mr. 
Parsons  to  use  all  such  measures  as  in  his  judgment  may  re- 
sult in  its  widest  possible  circulation. 


fROM  THE  LOS  ANGELES  TIMES,  JULY  15,  1901. 

A  society  of  clergy  and  laymen  has  been  formed  with  the 
avowed  object  of  "resisting  in  the  I/)S  Angeles  Diocese  Roman- 
izing Tendencies  in  the  Episcopal  Church;"  and  yesterday 
Rev.  Dr.  Geo.  Thos.  Dowling,  one  of  the  most  brilliant  preach- 
ers in  Southern  California,  struck  out  from  the  shoulder. 

Dr.  Dowling' s  sermon  is  published  in  full  herewith.  It 
will  make  a  sensation. 

He  contends  that  the  issue  ^deeper  than  forms  and  graver 
than  ritual — but  ho  sermon  speaks  Tor  itself. 

NOflCt'.*'' 

Those  desiring  copies  of  this  discourse  for  circulation  will  be  supplied 
by  the  Vestry  of  Christ  Church  at  wholesale  price — twenty  for  a  dollar, 
postage  prepaid.  Money  must  be  sent  with  order.  Smaller  orders  not 
taken.  Address 

GEO.  W.  PARSONS,  Junior  Warden, 

107  S.  Broadway.  Los  Angeles,  Cal. 

Single  copies  for  sale  at  Fowler  Bros.,  221  W.  Second  Street,  Los 
Angeles;  and  at  other  book  stores. 


"ROMANIZING  TENDENCIES  IN  THE  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH" 

BY  THE 

REV.  GEO.  TI10S.  BOWLING,  D.  D. 

IN  CHRIST  EPISCOPAL   CHURCH,  LOS  ANGELES,  CAL. 


Gal.  II.  ii :  "When  Peter  was  come  to  Antioch,  I  with- 
stood him  to  the  face,  because  he  was  to  be  blamed." 

I  am  not  here  today,  my  friends,  to  condemn  ritual;  for  I 
am  a  ritualist,  and  so  are  you.  The  man  who  shakes  hands 
with  his  neighbor  uses  a  rite  with  which  to  symbolize  a 
thought;  and  that  is  ritualism.  I  could  not  be  a  Churchman 
without  advocating  its  use;  but  no  one  can  be  a  good  Church- 
man while  advocating  its  abuse.  The  distinction  between 
those  terms,  I  shall  shortly  consider. 

At  the  same  time  I  realize  that  the  worst  abuse  of  ritual  is 
the  abuse  of  Ritualists.  If  there  must  be  controversy,  so  be  it! 
"As  far  as  lieth  in  you,"  saith  the  apostle,  "live  peaceably 
with  all  men."  But  there  come  times  when  it  no  longer  lies 
within  us,  nor  should.  St.  Paul  strove  with  St.  Peter,  and 
"withstood  him  to  the  face,  because  he  was  to  be  blamed." 
Yet  you  will  notice  that  St.  Paul,  who  is  the  typical  Broad 
Churchman  of  the  New  Testament,  did  not  assail  his  motives. 
He  did  not  charge  him  with  dishonesty.  He  did  not  mistake 
heat  for  light,  nor  concussion  for  discussion.  As  every  broad- 
minded  disputant  should,  he  dealt,  not  with  personalities,  but 
with  principles. 

Two  other  distinctions  and  then  I  shall  pass  on  to  the 
chief  burden  of  my  message. 

When  I  speak  of  certain  of  the  clergy  as  seeking  to  intro- 
duce the  errors  of  Romanism  into  this  Church  which  historians 

312794 


have  been  accustomed  to  speak  of  as  the  '  'bulwark  of  Protest- 
antism," I  mean  just  what  I  say:  certain  of  the  clergy,  but 
not  the  clergy.  I  believe  that  the  great  body  of  our  ministry 
throughout  England  and  America,  are  as  yet  true  to  the  stand- 
ards of  our  fathers,  and  the  Holy  Scriptures.  So  far  as  our 
own  Diocese  is  concerned  I  thank  God  for  the  character  of  the 
clergy, taken  as  a  whole, who  have  recently  come  into  our  midst. 
It  indicates  progress,  and  inspires  hope  for  the  future.  From 
all  the  reports  which  I  hear  concerning  the  past,  the  outlook  is 
not  so  dark  as  it  was  a  few  years  ago.  And  I  am  not  forgetful 
that  these  changes  have  taken  place  under  the  wise  and  kindly 
administration  of  our  present  Bishop;  a  man,  whom,  whatever 
our  individual  views  of  Churchmanship  may  be,  we  all  delight 
to  honor  and  to  love;  who,  if  he  were  to  die  tomorrow,  could 
receive  no  more  fitting  tribute  than  that  which  was  expressed 
of  the  late  Arch-bishop  of  Canterbury,  when,  with  his  work 
finished,  he  passed  from  the  Church  militant  up  to  the  Church 
triumphant,  and  they  said  of  him,  that  he  was  "a  High  Church- 
man, with  broad  leanings  and  evangelical  fervor."  If  all  the 
clergy  of  our  communion  were  of  such  a  type  as  he,  whether 
their  individual  proclivities  were  High  or  Broad  or  Low,  there 
would  be  no  need  that  such  a  discourse  as  this  should  be  de- 
livered. 

NOT  OF  IT  BUT  IN  IT. 

And  once  more — for  there  is  nothing  like  clear  discrimi- 
nation as  an  aid  in  straight  thinking — you  will  observe  that 
our  theme  this  morning  is  not  the  Romanizing  Tendencies  of 
the  Bpiscopal  Church,  but  in  it.  Such  tendencies  are  not 
native  to  our  communion.  They  are  exotics  introduced  from 
without;  introduced  as  they  tell  us  rabbits  were  introduced  into 
Australia,  only  at  last  to  become  a  pest.  It  is  true  that  the 
word  "Protestantism"  has  never  been  a  legal  title  of  the  Church 
of  England;  but  it  is  equally  true  that  the  thing,  Protestantism, 
has  been  inwrought  into  the  very  fabric  of  her  history.  In  the 
litany  of  the  English  Prayer- Book  in  the  days  of  the  Reform- 
ation, and  after,  there  appeared  this  petition:  "From  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  and  all  his  detestable  enormities,  good  Lord 
deliver  us."  If  that  is  not  Protestantism,  what  is  it?  When 


this  American  branch  of  the  Church  came  to  be  organized,  the 
Mother  Church  of  England,  with  no  question,  permitted  that 
word  Protestant  to  become  a  part  of  our  legal  title.  As  such 
it  stands  today;  otherwise,  why  all  this  turmoil  about  chang- 
ing it.  The  fact  is,  that  the  question  was  never  seriously 
raised,  until  the  so-called  Oxford  movement  of  sixty  or  seventy 
years  ago,  when  John  Henry  Newman  and  his  associates,  went 
from  the  Church  of  England  to  Rome,  and  Edward  Bouverie 
Pusey  and  his  associates  once  more  introduced  Rome  into  the 
Church  of  England. 

And  new  the  successors  of  these  men,  in  this 
American  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  ours,  propose,  if 
possible,  at  the  Triennial  Convention  in  San  Francisco  next 
October,  to  fling  aside  our  historic  name,  and  call  themselves 
"The  American  Church."  I  do  not  believe  they  will  succeed. 
I  believe  the  conservative  counsel  of  the  wise  men  of  the  East, 
who  shall  gather  there,  will  outvote  them  every  time;  for  I 
have  all  confidence  in  this  grand  old  Church  of  ours,  when  it 
comes  to  a  crisis. 

OTHERS  WILL  SMILE. 

But  suppose  they  do  succeed,  what  then?  My  friends,  the 
only  people  to  be  hurt  by  such  folly  will  be  ourselves.  These 
other  communions  about  us  will  simply  smile,  and  pass  by  on 
the  other  side  of  the  street.  We  shall  present  to  them  only  an 
amusing  spectacle  of  a  company  of  men,  arrogating  to  our- 
selves, a  title  to  which  we  have  no  right,  because  we  are  mis- 
led by  an  overwhelming  sense  of  our  own  importance.  Would 
to  God  that  these  men  had  enough  saving  sense  of  humor  to 
rescue  them  from  absurdity!  But  this,  aftea  all,  is  a  subordi- 
nate question  of  comparative  irrelevance . 

What  is  the  real  principle  at  stake?  Do  not  be  so  silly  as 
to  join  in  the  cheap  superficiality,  that  this, which  is  today  arous- 
ing the  English  people,  shaking  Parliament,  and  is  destined  to 
arouse  our  Church  in  America,  is  the  old  question  between 
High  Church  and  Low  and  Broad.  Years  ago  that  question  was 
settled.  Neither  is  it  a  mere  matter  of  millinery.  If  that 
were  all,  it  would  cease  to  be  a  struggle  demanding  respect, 
and  become  only  a  squabble  deserving  contempt.  Neither  you 
nor  I  would  waste  our  time  with  such  trivialities.  But  you 


might  just  as  well  say,  that  when  our  Colonies  threw  out  their 
banners  in  the  face  of  Great  Britain  125  years  ago  and  sur- 
rendered the  quiet  of  peace  for  the  disquiet  of  war,  their  battles 
were  only  for  a  bit  of  bunting.  It  was  what  that  bunting 
stood  for  which  gave  dignity  to  their  cause.  We  may  be  pro- 
testing against  a  posture;  but  if  we  do,  it  is  simply  because 
that  posture,  as  we  believe,  teaches  an  imposture.  And  that  is 
the  abuse  of  ritual.  Ritual  is  used  when  it  teaches  a  truth. 
It  is  abused  when  it  teaches  an  error. 

My  friends,  listen  closely  now.  The  whole  question  is 
this:  Will  this  Anglo-Saxon  race  ever  permit  itself  to  be  led 
back  again,  as, — I  say  it  in  all  kindness,  and  simply  because  I 
think  I  can  show  it  to  be  true, — as  these  men  are  trying  to  lead 
it  back,  to  that  slavery  of  mind  and  spirit  from  which,  by 
God's  grace  they  escaped,  with  groans  and  tears,  in  the  days 
of  the  Protestant  reformation  in  the  sixteenth  century  ?  Is  it 
true  that  the  Church  of  the  tuture  is  to  be  the  Church  of  priest- 
craft, as  in  the  Middle  Ages  it  was  when,  with  his  supposedly 
miraculous  power,  and  divine  authority,  the  priest,  from  the 
day  of  a  man's  birth  until  the  day  of  his  death;  yes,  and  after 
that,  following  him  with  his  horrible  clutch  into  the  realms  of 
shadow;  the  priest,  came  between  the  man  and  his  Maker,  and 
said,  with  all  the  awful  power  of  his  anathema,  *  'Unless  you 
come  to  God  through  me,  you  shall  go  to  Hell  ?" 

That  is  the  question;  whether  it  assumes  the  form  of  au- 
ricular confessional,  or  the  intercessory  power  of  the  priesthood 
with  the  Virgin  Mary  and  the  saints,  or  the  ability  of  the 
priest  with  a  word,  to  change  a  bit  of  bread  into  the  very  body 
of  God;  that  is  the  question;  it  is  the  whole  question;  and  it 
is  the  only  question.  Will  this  Anglo-Saxon  people,  whose  very 
name  is  a  synonym  for  liberty, obey  the  voice  of  their  God  when 
He  says  to  every  man :  "Arise  and  stand  upon  thy  feet;"  or 
will  it  hand  over  once  more  its  conscience  into  the  keeping  of 
some  magic-working  priesthood,  and  permit  itself  to  be  robbed 
of  that  liberty  from  such  intolerable  bondage  which  the  reform- 
ation gained? 

THE  CONFESSIONAL  ATTACKED. 

Do  you  ask  what  bondage?  Well  to  begin  with,  the 
bondage  of  the  confessional.  Do  you  realize  the  awful  power 

6 


which  this  would  give  over  the  susceptible  consciences  of  your 
wives  and  daughters?  Are  you  willing  that  any  fallible  man, 
whether  he  wear  the  garb  of  layman  or  priest,  shall  teach  that 
it  is  their  duty — mark  you  that  word  for  I  shall  refer  to  it  in  a 
moment — their  duty,  before  they  shall  go  confidingly  to  father 
or  mother,  or  any  other  living  person,  to  go  to  him,  and  lay 
bare  to  him  all  their  secret  words  and  deeds  and  thoughts  ? 
Perhaps  you  do  not  know  the  infamous  history  of  the  confes- 
sional. It  may  be  just  as  well  that  you  do  not;  but  this  is 
what  one  of  our  own  Bishops,  Bishop  Wilberforce  of  England 
thought  of  it.  Said  he:  "It  is  one  of  the  worst  developments 
of  popery.  In  the  first  place  as  regards  the  penitent,  it  is  a 
system  of  unnatural  excitement,  a  sort  of  spiri.ual  dram-drink- 
ing fraught  with  evil  to  the  whole  spirtual  constitution.  In 
families  it  introduces  untold  mischief.  As  regards  the  priest, 
it  brings  in  a  wretched  system  of  cauistry.  But,  far  worse 
than  this,  it  necessitates  the  terrible  evil  of  familiar  dealing 
with  sin,  especially  with  sins  of  uncleanliness,  thereby  some- 
times even  tempting  to  their  growth." 

And  now  here  is  one  specimen  among  many  which  is  pub- 
lished by  the  League  of  the  Holy  Cross,  and  circulated  by 
thousands  in  the  Church  of  England,  in  which  the  priest  is 
put  before  the  very  father  and  mother,  and  the  child  is  taught 
as  follows:  "It  is  to  the  priest  only  that  the  child  must  ac- 
knowledge his  sins  if  he  desires  that  God  should  forgive  him. 
Do  you  know  why?  It  is  because  God,  when  on  earth,  gave 
to  his  priests,  and  to  them  alone,  the  divine  power  of  forgiving 
sins.  Go  to  the  priest,  who  is  the  doctor  of  your  soul  and 
who  cures  you  in  the  name  of  God.  I  have  known  poor  chil- 
dren who  concealed  their  sins  in  confession  for  years;  they  were 
very  unhappy;  were  tormented  with  remorse,  and  if  they  had 
died  in  that  state  they  would  certainly  have  gone  to  the  ever- 
lasting fires  of  hell." 

But  perhaps  you  say  that  was  in  England.  Yes  it  was, 
though  precisely  the  same  thing  is  being  taught  in  this  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  Church  of  America.  But  this  was  not  in  Eng- 
land; this  was  in  Los  Angeles,  and  less  than  a  year  ago;  when 
a  priest  of  this  Diocese,  a  Christian  gentleman  whom  for  his 
learning  and  piety  I  profoundly  respect,  went  to  a  mission 

7 


station,  which  had  recently  come  from  another  communion 
into  this,  led  hither  by  its  devoted  and  godly  minister.  In  a 
booklet,  the  name  of  which  is  "The  Pilgrim's  Path,"  a  copy  of 
which  I  now  hold  in  my  hand,  on  the  title  page  of  which  is 
the  published  statement  that  this  issue  is  of  the  thirteenth 
thousand,  there  appear  the  following  instructions:  "How  to 
make  a  confession.  If  you  have  never  been  to  confession,  go 
and  ask  your  priest  to  advise  you  how  to  prepare  for  it.  We 
should  look  upon  confession  not  only  as  a  privilege — some- 
thing to  do  us  good — but  as  a  duty,  something  which  we  owe 
to  God,"  (and  the  word  "owe"  is  italicised,)  "therefore  we 
should  have  regular  and  stated  times  for  going  to  confession 
and  observe  the  following  rules:"  On  page  72  of  the  same 
book  it  says :  "When  you  go  to  your  confessional  kneel  down 
and  think  that  you  are  at  the  feet  of  Jesus  on  His  cross,  and 
say :  In  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  Amen.  I  confess  to  God  the  Father,  God  the 
Son,  and  God  the  Holy  Ghost,  before  the  whole  company  of 
Heaven,  and  before  you  Father,  that  I  have  sinned  exceeding- 
ly in  thought,  word,  and  deed,  by  my  fault,  by  own  fault,  by 
my  own  grevious  fault.  Especially  I  remember  having  com- 
mitted the  following  sins  since  my  last  confession,  which  was 
(so  long)  ago.  Here  mention  your  sins.  For  these  and  all 
my  other  sins  which  I  cannot  now  remember,  I  am  heartily 
sorry,  I  firmly  propose  to  amend,  and  ask  you,  Father,  pen- 
ance, advice  and  absolution.  Now  reverently  listen  to  the  ad- 
vice given  and  the  penance  enjoined,  by  your  confessor;  and 
joyfully  receive  absolution." 

And  these  people  were  taught  by  this  priest,  not  simply 
that  it  was  a  privilege — as  it  is  always  the  privilege  of  any 
burdened  soul  who  chooses,  to  seek  the  tender  counsel  of  his 
minister — these  people  were  taught,  that  it  was  their  duty  to 
go  and  confess  to  him;  and  were  counselled  to  do  so  before 
they  partook  of  the  holy  communion. 

WHAT  BONDAGE? 

Do  you  ask  again,  what  bondage?  The  bondage  which 
comes  from  the  assumption  of  supernatural  powers  in  the  holy 
communion,  because  of  the  priestly  office.  If  it  is  in  the 

8 


clergyman's  power,  without  any  figure  of  speech,  to  turn  that 
bread  into  the  real  body  of  Christ,  and  that  wine  into  His  real 
blood  ;  and  if  it  is  essential  to  your  salvation  that  you  shall  par- 
take of  it;  and  if  it  is  within  the  precincts  of  his  authority  to 
withhold  it  from  you;  then  again,  he  stands  between  you  and 
your  God.  And  this  is  what  these  men  claim  to  do,  or  else, 
as  I  see  it,  the  English  language  has  no  meaning.  In  proof 
of  this  I  quote  again  from  one  of  their  manuals  for  children. 
This  is  the  instruction  given:  "When  the  priest  begins  the 
prayer,  that  which  is  on  the  altar  is  bread  and  wine;  when  the 
priest  ends  the  prayer  that  which  is  on  the  altar  is  Christ's 
body  and  blood;  it  is  Jesus;  it  is  God.  Who  does  this?  The 
priest  acting  for  Jesus  in  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  How 
does  he  do  it ;  I  cannot  tell  you.  He  does  not  know  himself 
how  he  does  it;  but  it  is  done.  It  is  a  work  of  God,  and  no 
one  knows  how  God  works.  If  you  were  to  ask  the  great  St. 
Michael,  he  could  not  tell  you.  It  you  were  to  ask  the  blessed 
Mary,  she  could  not  tell  you.  It  is  God's  own  secret,  a 
knowledge  which  belongs  to  Him  and  to  no  one  else.  We  go  to 
the  altar  and  kneel  down,  and  the  priest  comes  to  us  with  the 
blessed  sacrament.  We  receive  that  which  looks  like  bread 
and  which  tastes  like  bread;  we  receive  that  which  looks  like 
wine,  and  which  tastes  like  wine ;  but  that  which  we  receive  is 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  It  is  Jesus  Himself;  it  is  Al- 
mighty God." 

Is  that  Protestantism  or  is  it  Romanism?  Who  can  tell? 
Perhaps  a  Romanist  can.  Well  this  is  what  a  Roman  Catholic 
priest,  writing  from  Manchester,  England,  says:  "At  this  hour 
5000  Church  of  England  clergymen  are  preaching  from  as 
many  Protestant  pulpits  the  Catholic  faith  to  Catholicizing  con- 
gregations, much  more  effectually,  with  less  suspicion  and  more 
acceptance,  that  we  can  ever  hope  to  do.  We  could  desire  no 
better  preparation  for  joining  the  Catholic  Church  than  the 
ritualist  preparatory  school ;  and  the  fact  that  from  them  we 
have  secured  the  majority  of  our  converts  strengthens  us  in 
our  view  of  it." 

SOWING  THE  SEED. 

Perhaps  a  Roman  Catholic  Cardinal  can  tell.  Well  this  is 
what  Cardinal  Vaughan  says:  "They  are  doing  our  work 

9 


much  better  than  we  ourselves  could  do  it ;  they  are  sowing 
the  seed;  while  we,  with  folded  hands,  are  standing  by  waiting 
to  reap  the  harvest." 

Now  doubtless  such  a  statement  as  that  of  the  manual 
quoted,  would  be  considered  too  extreme  by  many  of  the  High 
Churchmen  in  our  midst.  Then  why  should  they  teach  the 
same  thought  by  the  kind  of  ritual  which  they  employ  ?  If  it 
is  true,  or  if  they  think  that  it  is  true,  let  them  say  it  out  and 
out,  and  then  we  will  know  what  they  mean.  But  if  it  is  not 
true,  let  them  cease  to  imply  it  by  their  ritual ;  by  their  flec- 
tions and  their  genuflections. 

This,  my  friends,  is  why  the  Broad  Churchman  objects  to 
their  bowing  as  they  pass  the  altar  with  the  elements  upon  it.  It 
is  because  they  are  thereby  teaching  their  congregations  that  that 
bread  has  become  Jesus,  and  that  is  false.  This  is  why  we  ob- 
ject to  their  withholding  the  cup  from  the  communicant  when 
he  partakes  of  the  wine;  though  the  rubrics  declare  that  he 
shall  take  it  in  his  hands.  It  is  because  they  are  thereby 
teaching  by  ritual,  that  it  is  too  holy  to  be  touched  by  any  but 
the  priest.  This  is  why  we  object  to  their  changing  their 
robes  for  the  administration  of  the  holy  communion.  It  is  not 
that  we  care  for  so  insignificant  a  thing  as  how  they  shall 
dress.  That  is  a  matter  pertaining  entirely  to  their  own  taste. 
There  is  absolutely  no  law  in  our  church  to  prevent  a  man 
going  into  his  chancel  in  a  swallow-tail  coat  if  he  were  foolish 
enough  to  do  it.  But  it  is  because  they  therebj^  convey  the 
impression  that  their  ordinary  priestly  garb,  is  not  holy 
enough  for  such  an  hour.  Whether  they  intend  to  do  so  or 
not,  they  are  practicing  a  rite  which  teaches  an  untruth.  It 
is  a  poor  use  to  make  of  ritual,  when  we  employ  it  to  convey 
to  the  minds  of  our  congregations  an  error  which  we  do  not 
dare  to  express. 

IN  THIS  DIOCESE, 

But  in  this  Diocese  there  are  those  who  do  dare  to  express 
it.  There  is  an  organization  among  us,  a  branch  of  a  British 
society,  who  call  themselves  in  plain  English  "A  Confraternity 
for  the  Adoration — mark  that  word — the  Adoration  of  the 
Blessed  Sacrament."  Now  that  very  title  means  one  of  two 

10 


things,  and  it  can  mean  nothing  else.  Either  trans-substanti- 
ation has  taken  place  according  to  the  Roman  Catholic  doc- 
trine, and  that  bread  and  wine  has  become  Almighty  God, 
worthy  of  being  adored,  or  else  it  has  not.  If  it  has  not,  then 
to  adore  it  is  idolatry.  You  can  take  your  choice.  In  either 
case  it  is  a  practice  which  is  abhorent  to  all  the  teaching  and 
the  history  of  our  Church.  It  is  true  our  Lord  did  say  "This 
is  My  body."  But  it  seems  to  me  that  every  man  who  thinks 
should  know  that  he  was  using  thereby  a  figure  of  speech,  pre- 
cisely as  when  he  said,  "I  am  a  door."  But  a  whole  sacer- 
dotal system  has  been  built  up  about  the  misinterpretation  of 
four  words,  and  these  men  are  seeking  to  perpetuate  that  sys- 
tem. 

Thus,  in  the  manual  to  which  I  have  already  referred,  the 
manual  which  was  distributed  for  use  in  the  Church  of  the 
Neighborhood  of  this  city,  less  than  a  year  ago,  there  were 
these  instructions:  "At  the  Consecration  of  the  Bread,  say: 
Hail,  true  body  of  my  Lord  Jesus  Christ !  Prostrate  in  lowli- 
est devotion,  I  worship  and  adore  Thee.  At  the  Consecration 
of  the  Wine  say:  Hail,  true  blood  of  my  Lord  Jesus  Christ ! 
Prostrate  in  lowliest  devotion,  I  worship  and  adore  Thee." 
So,  likewise,  in  England  the  Venerable  Frederick  W.  Fairer, 
D.  D.,  F.  R.  S.,  Archdeacon  of  Westminister,  assures  us  that 
there  are  churches  where  the  prayer  prescribed  by  the  Church 
in  administering  the  elements  is  entirely  omitted,  and  nothing 
is  said  to  each  communicant  but  "The  body  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,"  and  "The  blood  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

Now,  what  can  be  the  only  possible  effect  of  this  thing 
upon  thinking  men  living  in  this  twentieth  century  ?  WThat 
has  been  the  effect  in  this  Diocese?  Why,  men  and  women, 
the  Episcopal  Church  was  the  first  religious  organization  in 
this  city.  But,  as  you  see  the  great  congregations  pouring 
forth  from  the  houses  of  worship  of  other  communions;  as  you 
see  the  number  of  men  among  them,  young  and  old,  what  kind 
of  a  commentary  is  it  upon  the  narrow  and  sacramentarian 
teaching,  which,  until  recent  years,  has  almost  exclusively 
prevailed  here  in  Southern  California  ?  Why  is  that  so  seldom 
the  men  are  seen  in  churches  of  this  type,  and  the  worshipers, 
as  a  rule,  are  composed  of  children  who  cannot  think,  and  women 

ii 


who,  with  their  sweet  and  spiritual  yearnings,  will  worship 
anyhow,  even  though  they  have  to  do  it  in  the  midst  of  super- 
stition? My  friends,  it  is  because  the  Anglo-Saxon  man  does 
not  want  this  thing ;  and  if  he  did  want  it  he  would  go  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  where  he  can  find  it  in  its  perfection. 

If  I  had  time  I  could  refer  to  the  practice  of  high  mass 
and  low  mass ;  to  requiems  for  the  dead,  and  other  Romish 
innovations,  which  have  been  introduced  into  our  midst.  But 
I  have  no  time  today  to  pursue  this  subject  further. 

TO  OTHER  CLERGY. 

To  my  brethren  in  the  ministry  I  would  say — and  God 
forbid  that  I  should  say  it  at  all,  unless  I  can  say  it  in  the 
spirit  of  sincerity,  and  earnestness,  and  brotherly  love — to  my 
brethren  in  the  ministry  I  would  say :  Why  should  you  alien- 
ate the  various  Protestant  bodies  about  you  by  persistently  em- 
phasizing points  of  difference,  instead  of  points  of  agreement  ? 
It  is  true  there  are  certain  historic  claims  for  this  Church, 
which  for  their  sakes  as  well  as  ours  we  must  defend.  There 
are  truths  for  which  we  stand  for  which  I  believe  no  other 
body  of  Christ's  disciples  in  the  world  so  fully  stands.  And  it 
is  this  which  makes  me  thank  God  every  day  that  my  steps 
have  been  led  into  this  fold.  Many  in  those  communions  are 
hungering  for  these  truths  and  they  do  not  know  it.  They 
are  hungering  for  just  that  which  you  have  to  give.  They 
are  hungering  in  their  services  to  feel  behind  them  a  great 
Catholic — in  the  only  real  sense  of  that  word — broad,  compre- 
hensive, historic  Church,  reaching  back  through  the  ages. 
They  are  hungering  for  the  dignity  of  our  worship,  the  beauty 
of  our  liturgy,  the  simplicity  of  our  creed,  the  possible  com- 
prehensiveness of  our  Christian  platform.  If  you  will  give 
them  half  a  welcome  they  will  gladly  come  to  you.  But  they 
are  Protestants,  as  we  are,  and  they  are  Anglo-Saxon  Protes- 
tants. They  do  not  want  your  elaborate  ritual  with  its  Italian 
accretions,  for  that  only  repels  and  disgusts  them. 

Tell  me !  Tell  me  if  you  can,  why  should  you  turn  your 
back  upon  them,  with  whom  we  have  so  much  in  common,  and 
your  face  toward  the  only  religious  body  in  the  world  which 

12 


persistently  refuses  to  recognize  you  or  your  orders,  and  never 
permits  an  opportunity  to  go  by  to  treat  you  with  contempt? 

I  tell  you  that  any  possible  union  of  our  communion  with 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  is  an  irridescent  dream  unless  you 
are  willing  to  fall  in  complete  allegiance  at  the  feet  of  their 
Pope.  And  I  ask  you  in  perfect  frankness,  and  am  willing  to 
be  corrected  if  I  am  wrong — have  I  not  shown  this  morning 
that  if  there  are  those  in  our  communion  and  out  of  it, who  be- 
gin to  harbor  the  suspicion  that  this  is  what  all  your  efforts  are 
leading  toward  ;  have  I  not  shown  that  they  at  least  have  some 
reason  for  their  fears? 

WHAT  TO  DO  ABOUT  IT? 

Well,  now  I  will  only  detain  you  a  few  moments  more, 
while  I  answer  the  practical  question  :  What  can  we  do  about 
it  ?  If  ever  there  was  a  time  when  we  needed  to  retain  that 
word  Protestant  it  is  now,  for  never  has  there  been  so  much 
reason  for  protest  within  our  own  ranks. 

In  every  onward  movement  there  are  four  things  which 
are  essential.  They  are  always  the  same  :  agitation  which 
may  result  in  education  ;  education  which  may  result  in  organ- 
ization, and  organization  which  may  result  in  reformation.  I 
can  refer  now  only  to  the  first  two,  leaving  the  others  to  follow 
as  God's  providence  may  direct. 

And  let  us  bear  in  mind  that  this  agitat  ion  is  not  of  our 
seeking.  We  are  men  of  peace.  We  would  much  prefer  that 
these  various  schools  of  thought  in  our  midst  should  represent, 
not  different  parties,  but  only  different  parts  of  one  grand 
Church.  There  is  room  for  all — High  and  I/)W  and  Broad — pro- 
vided they  are  in  very  deed  a  part  of  us.  This  is  the  boast  of 
our  Church,  and  I  rejoice  in  it.  I  would  not  have  it  other- 
wise, if  I  could.  I  would  be  broad  enough,  and  I  would  have 
you,  my  people,  broad  enough  to  include  even  what  may  seem 
to  us  to  be  narrowness.  But  there  is  no  room,  unless  the 
whole  battle  for  purity  and  freedom,  has  got  to  be  fought  over 
again — there  is  no  room  in  this  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
for  Romanism,  and  the  resulting  priestly  assumption  of  undue 
authority. 

13 


To  those  of  my  brethren  in  the  ministry  who  have  written 
me,  only  one  in  the  spirit  of  acrimony,  and  all  the  others  with 
kindness  and  brotherly  love,  not  to  precipitate  a  controversy,  I 
would  say  :  Why  my  dear  brethren ,  can  you  not  discern  the 
signs  of  the  times  ?  It  is  already  precipitated.  This  very  day 
arrangements  are  being  made  in  San  Francisco  for  the  publica- 
tion of  a  weekly  paper,  whose  chief  object  is  the  dissemination 
of  these  sacredotal  views,  which,  in  their  final  outcome,  as  I 
think  I  have  shown,  represent  only  another  term  for 
Romanism.  This  very  day  agents  are  at  work  in  this  Diocese 
trying  to  secure  subscribers  for  that  paper.  The  Rev.  Stephen 
Innes,  the  Rector  of  the  Church  of  St.  Mary,  the  Virgin,  in  the 
city  of  San  Francisco,  a  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  in  which 
prayers  to  the  Virgin  Mary  are  offered  in  Latin,  thus  frankly 
states  the  purpose  of  this  publication.  He  says  :  "One  of 
the  main  objects  of  the  paper  will  be  to  counteract — to  kill — 
Protestantism  in  the  Episcopal  Church.  We  believe  the  Church 
is  overrun  with  a  particular  form  of  Protestantism  that  is  an- 
tagonistic to  the  old  Catholic  doctrine,  and  we  want  to  root  it 
out.  We  hold  that  the  advancement  of  the  future  Church  de- 
pends upon  the  suppression  of  this  Protestantism." 

My  brethren;  is  it  any  too  soon  for  somebody  on  this 
Pacific  Coast  to  have  taken  up  the  gauntlet  which  these  men 
have  thrown  down  ? 

ON  THE  WARPATH. 

A  gentleman  said  to  me  this  last  week,  "I  understand  you 
have  gone  on  the  warpath."  And  as  I  thought  of  such  state- 
ments as  that  which  I  have  just  quoted  from  the  San  Francisco 
clergyman  and  editor,  I  answered,  "Well,  if  you  call  it  the  war- 
path, perhaps  it  is  ;  but  I  found  when  I  got  there  that  I  had 
no  reason  to  feel  lonesome."  These  men  have  been  on  the 
warpath  for  years,  and  in  all  this  Diocese  not  a  voice  has  thus 
far  been  publicly  lifted,  so  far  as  I  can  learn,  to  declare  in  the 
name  of  our  Bible  and  our  Prayer  Book,  and  our  beloved  Church, 
that  if  they  are  determined  to  advocate  these  teachings,  in  our 
Protestant  Episcopal  communion,  where  they  do  not  belong,  it 
would  be  better  for  them,  and  for  us,  if  they  would  go  into  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  where  they  evidently  do  belong. 

14 


And  to  the  men  like  him  whom  I  have  quoted,  who  are 
threatening  to  crush  out  Protestantism  from  our  midst,  I  would 
say,  "My  dear  sirs,  you  will  never  succeed.  It  is  possible, 
though  not  probable,  that  you  may  wipe  out  the  name,  but 
you  will  never  get  rid  of  the  thing.  You  are  hammering  at  an 
anvil  which  has  worn  out  a  great  many  hammers,  and  will 
wear  out  a  great  many  more.  Your  predecessors  tried  it  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  and  though  they  had  all  the  power  of  the 
Inquisition  on  their  side,  they  failed.  You  will  find,  as  many 
others  before  you  have  found,  that  in  trying  to  stamp  out  the 
flames  you  are  only  spreading  the  sparks.  If  you  can  appeal 
to  men's  judgment,  then  you  will  surely  win,  as  you  ought  to 
win.  But  if  you  come  to  them  only  with  that  ecclesiastical 
authority  which  you  are  seeking  to  borrow  from  the  Middle 
Ages,  you  and  your  associates  are  as  certain  to  fail  in  the  end, 
as  yonder  sun  to  pursue  its  appointed  course.  All  your  ana- 
themas cannot  bring  back  the  night  when  the  day  is  already 
rising  toward  the  noon. 

Gentlemen,  we  do  not  want  medievalism.  We  are  not 
living  in  those  ages  of  darkness  which  you  prefer  to  call  the 
ages  of  faith.  We  are  living  today.  Our  Church  exists  for 
the  people  who  are  now  on  earth,  and  those  who  are  to  follow. 
And  with  this  in  view  I  cannot  better  close  than  by  quoting, 
with  approval,  those  ringing  words  uttered  in  the  House  of 
Commons  by  the  Hon.  A.  J.  Balfour.  I  believe  they  are  as 
true  of  America  as  they  are  of  England.  "I  do  not  conceal 
for  one  moment,"  he  says,  "my  own  belief  that  if  this  Church 
is  to  remain  the  Church  of  the  great  majority  of  the  nation,  it 
must  be  that  ancient  institution  as  it  was  purified  and  remod- 
eled at  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  It  is,  indeed,  the  Church 
of  St.  Anslem  and  St.  Augustine,  but  it  is  something  more. 
It  is  the  Church  whose  doctrine  was  purified  and  whose  ritual 
was  simplified  in  the  sixteenth  century,  and  it  is  only  so  long 
as  it  retains  that  character  that  it  can  hope  to  retain  the  affec- 
tions of  the  English  people. ' ' 


Syrac 


"ottf  I? 

^ate. 


ros. 


>«^- 


U.C.BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


YC   15835 


in 

CDMSb3Q331 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


